Apocrypha and the deuterocanonical books

Socratus O' Pericles

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
32,914
Apocrypha are more generally works of unknown authorship or of doubtful origin.

It is speculated that the word "apocryphal" was first applied to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated.

It is mainly(it seems) religious texts that are considered apocryphal e.g. texts produced by ancient Chinese sages as apocryphal were used as symbols legitimizing and guaranteeing the Emperor's Heavenly Mandate.

Of course when we get to the Bible we can clearly see the constructed nature of this document with early publishers leaving large sections out for sometimes spurious reasons, e.g. disputes over authorship or omitting writings not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church.

This leads us to the modern use of the phrase apocryphal which means a good or amusing story which most likely is untrue.

Hardly a sound methodology for building one's understanding of life, the universe and the timeless.
 


statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
55,055
Apocrypha are more generally works of unknown authorship or of doubtful origin.

It is speculated that the word "apocryphal" was first applied to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated.

It is mainly(it seems) religious texts that are considered apocryphal e.g. texts produced by ancient Chinese sages as apocryphal were used as symbols legitimizing and guaranteeing the Emperor's Heavenly Mandate.

Of course when we get to the Bible we can clearly see the constructed nature of this document with early publishers leaving large sections out for sometimes spurious reasons, e.g. disputes over authorship or omitting writings not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church.

This leads us to the modern use of the phrase apocryphal which means a good or amusing story which most likely is untrue.

Hardly a sound methodology for building one's understanding of life, the universe and the timeless.
Well, quite.
 

Bill

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 1, 2009
Messages
8,115
something about the pope
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645
All very Protestant.

Understandable too I suppose given the deceptions perpetrated by bad and heretical catholic theologians since Vatican two and the current True and False popes all residing together in the cesspit of the Vatican City state.
 

Deadlock

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 4, 2011
Messages
6,170
All very Protestant.

Understandable too I suppose given the deceptions perpetrated by bad and heretical catholic theologians since Vatican two and the current True and False popes all residing together in the cesspit of the Vatican City state.
[video=youtube;lXhU9zacjzw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXhU9zacjzw[/video]
 

hollandia

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 11, 2012
Messages
30,149
Apocrypha are more generally works of unknown authorship or of doubtful origin.

It is speculated that the word "apocryphal" was first applied to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated.

It is mainly(it seems) religious texts that are considered apocryphal e.g. texts produced by ancient Chinese sages as apocryphal were used as symbols legitimizing and guaranteeing the Emperor's Heavenly Mandate.

Of course when we get to the Bible we can clearly see the constructed nature of this document with early publishers leaving large sections out for sometimes spurious reasons, e.g. disputes over authorship or omitting writings not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church.

This leads us to the modern use of the phrase apocryphal which means a good or amusing story which most likely is untrue.

Hardly a sound methodology for building one's understanding of life, the universe and the timeless.
I understand apocryphal to mean "of dubious origin" meaning not necessarily that it is untrue, but that it cannot be verified. This has become shorthand for being "a yuuuuge bigly fake news pants on fire" type thing.

In the religious sphere the apocrypha are those books which have been removed (or added to an appendix somewhere) from the bible as set out in the Canon of Trent.

Of course to add to this confusion, there are a number of "non canonical" scriptures, infancy gospels, proto gospels and so on, that were not accpeted due to their being at odds with one or more elements of doctrine.

So not only is it confusing, it's somewhat selective in its inclusions. Sort of like having a couple of popes to choose from, and hiding one in the background.
 

Volatire

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
13,643
Apocrypha are more generally works of unknown authorship or of doubtful origin.

It is speculated that the word "apocryphal" was first applied to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated.

It is mainly(it seems) religious texts that are considered apocryphal e.g. texts produced by ancient Chinese sages as apocryphal were used as symbols legitimizing and guaranteeing the Emperor's Heavenly Mandate.

Of course when we get to the Bible we can clearly see the constructed nature of this document with early publishers leaving large sections out for sometimes spurious reasons, e.g. disputes over authorship or omitting writings not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church.

This leads us to the modern use of the phrase apocryphal which means a good or amusing story which most likely is untrue.

Hardly a sound methodology for building one's understanding of life, the universe and the timeless.
zoo.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,462
All very Protestant.

Understandable too I suppose given the deceptions perpetrated by bad and heretical catholic theologians since Vatican two and the current True and False popes all residing together in the cesspit of the Vatican City state.
Hopefully BtB will chip in and settle this dispute - do the Orange Order accept Francis as Pope?
 

The Field Marshal

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
43,645

Mitsui2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
32,351
All very Protestant.

Understandable too I suppose given the deceptions perpetrated by bad and heretical catholic theologians since Vatican two and the current True and False popes all residing together in the cesspit of the Vatican City state.
You appear to be getting a bit obsessed with the outward manifestations of religion lately, Marsh, if you don't mind me saying so.

I hope it's not a sign of some kind of spiritual turmoil.
 

Old Mr Grouser

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
6,341
[video=youtube;IlmJXY2nO4Y]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlmJXY2nO4Y[/video]


All very Protestant.

Understandable too I suppose given the deceptions perpetrated by bad and heretical catholic theologians since Vatican two and the current True and False popes all residing together in the cesspit of the Vatican City state
.
No it is not; anything but. That OP is totallyand absolutely RC.

You 'll see that in the Thread Title there's that very RC word 'Deuterocanonical' .

That word is used exclusively by Roman Catholics. A Protestant wouldn't use the term; it would imply acceptance of the rulings of the Council of Trent. There's very few Protestants have ever have heard of it.

The OP's use of that word, and the philosophy of, " building one's understanding of life, the universe and the timeless.", makes me think that Socratus may have been through an RC seminary orTeacher Training College.

Deuterocanonical is the RC term for those Books of St Jerome's Apocrypha which the Council of Trent ruled were the Inspired Word of God and so had placed into the canon of the Old Testament; as opposed to those other Books - such as the Prayer of Manasseh - which they had discarded.

St Jerome himself hadn't been sure about them; which is why he'd placed them at the back of his Bible in a separate section.

Greek Orthodox Christians accept all the Apocryphal books as a part of the Bible, Jews and Bible-believing Protestants deny that any of the Apocrypha was inspired by God.

The C-of-E soft-centre has never made it's mind up; all the Books of the Apocrypha are in the KJV; but, following Jerome they're placed in a separate section at the back, not included in the Old Testament.

"Deuterocanonical" is a technical term exclusive to the RCC.
 

Old Mr Grouser

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 29, 2009
Messages
6,341
...
Of course when we get to the Bible we can clearly see the constructed nature of this document with early publishers leaving large sections out for sometimes spurious reasons, e.g. disputes over authorship or omitting writings not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church. ...
When I read that I worry for your spiritual welfare.

Could you enlarge on that, please, and perhaps,give us some examples?

Did you get your ideas at a teacher-training college that was sourcing its theology from the Dominican Biblical Institute?

Or did you attend Maynooth seminary during the time they were entranced by the Gospel of Thomas?


[video=youtube;xVU_ne9Octs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVU_ne9Octs[/video]
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top